On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 09:48:04AM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote: > On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 08:49:01 +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > On 02. 12. 20 10:05, Michael Tretter wrote: > > > When running make dt_binding_check, the xlnx,vcu-settings binding > > > triggers the following two warnings: > > > > > > 'additionalProperties' is a required property > > > > > > example-0: vcu@a0041000:reg:0: [0, 2684620800, 0, 4096] is too long > > > > > > Fix the binding and make the checker happy. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > The xlnx,vcu-settings binding was reviewed [0] before the bot started to > > > run automated tests on the device tree bindings, but now produces some > > > warnings. The original patch that introduces the binding is still in > > > Michal's tree and I am not entirely sure how to handle it, but here is a > > > patch. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200429213659.GA9051@bogus/ > > > --- > > > .../bindings/soc/xilinx/xlnx,vcu-settings.yaml | 15 ++++++++++++--- > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx/xlnx,vcu-settings.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx/xlnx,vcu-settings.yaml > > > index 378d0ced43c8..cb245f400287 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx/xlnx,vcu-settings.yaml > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx/xlnx,vcu-settings.yaml > > > @@ -26,9 +26,18 @@ required: > > > - compatible > > > - reg > > > > > > +additionalProperties: false > > > + > > > examples: > > > - | > > > - xlnx_vcu: vcu@a0041000 { > > > - compatible = "xlnx,vcu-settings", "syscon"; > > > - reg = <0x0 0xa0041000 0x0 0x1000>; > > > + fpga { > > > + #address-cells = <2>; > > > + #size-cells = <2>; > > > + > > > + xlnx_vcu: vcu@a0041000 { > > > + compatible = "xlnx,vcu-settings", "syscon"; > > > + reg = <0x0 0xa0041000 0x0 0x1000>; > > > + }; > > > > IIRC we had been discussing this recently and Rob wanted to have just > > 1/1 mapping here. > > > > Take a look at 0db958b689ca9. > > Thanks for the pointer. > > Rob: Is there some kind of rule, when to use a 1/1 mapping and when to add a > bus with more cells? I still see several examples that add a bus with 2 cells. > I assume that they more or less legacy, but I didn't find any discussion going > beyond the commit description of 0db958b689ca9, which "just" fixes the > warnings. > > I will send a v2, but I'd like to understand the rationale for having the 1/1 > mapping first. Simplifies the example is all. This one is fine as-is. Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
